9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 605X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In Surya Pharmaceuticals’s case (2006 (5) TMI 46 - HIGH COURT, DELHI), the court held that administrative convenience could be a valid ground for transfer of the assessee’s case. In the circumstances of this case, the court is of the opinion that the opinion formation cannot be faulted – there is no gainsaying to the fact that but for the centralisation there could be different approaches leading to differing block assessment orders. - W.P.(C) 3898/2013 - - - Dated:- 19-10-2016 - MR. S. RAVINDRA BHAT MS. DEEPA SHARMA JJ. Petitioner Through: Mr. Salil Kapoor, Mr. Sanat Kapoor, Mr. Sumit Lalchandani and Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Advocates Respondents Through: Mr. Dileep Shivpuri, Sr. Standing Counsel, Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Jr. Standi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Income Tax, Jalandhar on 24.01.2013. Upon its protest that an order under Section 167 was furnished to it, the assessee was provided with the impugned order dated 11.09.2012. The said impugned order reads as follows: A request was received from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Ludhiana vide letter F. No. CIT(C)/JB/Cent./32/12-13/33 dated 09/04/2012 for centralization of below mentioned case of M/s Prominent Players of Land Deals Group of cases, Ludhiana from ACIT CIT 32(1) ITO Ward 33(1) New Delhi of this charge to Central Circle-I. Jalandhar under the charge of the CIT (Central), Ludhiana. As this case was to be transferred out of Delhi u/s 127(2) of the income Tax Act, 1961, an opportunity, was given to the assessees to file ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Therefore, in exercise of the powers, conferred by Sub Section(2) of the Section 127 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and all other powers enabling me on this behalf, I, the Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-XI, New Delhi hereby transfer the case, the particulars of which is mentioned in Column from the Assessing Officers mentioned in Column-4 to the Assessing Officer mentioned in column-5 of the Annexure below after receiving the [Not Eligible in the copy received from the Respondent] 3. It is argued that the impugned order as well as the notice which preceded it are unsustainable. Learned counsel relies upon the Supreme Court s judgment in Ajantha Industries vs. Central Board of Direct Tax (1976) 102 ITR 281 (SC) and ruling of this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er of Income-tax (1967) 63 ITR 219 (SC), where this court was dealing with section 34 of the old Act. It is clear that there is no requirement in any of the provisions of the Act or any section laying down as a condition for the initiation of the proceedings that the reasons which induced the Commissioner to accord sanction to proceed under section 34 must also be communicated to the assessee. The Income-tax Officer need not communicate to the assessee the reasons which led him to initiate the proceedings under section 34. The case under section 34 is clearly distinguishable from that of a transfer order under section 127(1) of the Act. When an order under section 34 is made the aggrieved assessee can agitate the matter in appeal again ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le opportunity of being heard with a view to enable him to effectively show cause against the proposed transfer. The notice must also propose to give a personal hearing. It is also necessary to mention in the notice the reasons for the proposed transfer so that the assessee could make an effective representation with reference to the reasons set out. It is not sufficient merely to say in the notice that the transfer is proposed to facilitate detailed and co-ordinated investigation . The reasons cannot be vague and too general in nature but must be specific and based on material facts. It is again not merely sufficient to record the reasons in the file but it is also necessary to communicate the same to the affected party. 7. The asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndhar. The materials on record filed along with the counter affidavit support this conclusion. The judgment in Surya Pharmaceuticals s case (supra), we notice, was rendered after Melco India P. Ltd. s case (supra). In Surya Pharmaceuticals s case (supra), the court held that administrative convenience could be a valid ground for transfer of the assessee s case. In the circumstances of this case, the court is of the opinion that the opinion formation cannot be faulted there is no gainsaying to the fact that but for the centralisation there could be different approaches leading to differing block assessment orders. 9. For the above reasons, the writ petition is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. - - TaxTMI - TMITax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
